BESB: Consumer Satisfaction Survey 2012

 

Connecticut Board of Education and Services for the Blind

Vocational Rehabilitation Services Program

 

 

Survey Report:

Fiscal Year 2012

 

 

                               Diana T. Cohen, Ph.D.

                               Principal Investigator

 

Owen Rogers

Research Assistant

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

            Conducted by:

 

 

 

Issued September 2012

 

 


Table of Contents

 

Summary Background……………................................1

 

Summary of Notable Findings……………………..……2

 

Ratings for BESB Services…………………………..…..4

 

BESB Counselor Ratings………………………………..22

 

Overall Satisfaction with BESB Services....................45

 

Methodology……………………………….......................54

 

Annotated Questionnaire…………………………………55

 


Study Background

 

The State of Connecticut Bureau of Rehabilitative Services, Board of Education and Services for the Blind (BESB) Program, commissioned the Center for Public Policy and Social Research (CPPSR) at Central Connecticut State University (CCSU) to conduct a customer satisfaction survey of their service recipients for fiscal year 2012.  This work represents a continuation of research conducted by the Center for Survey Research and Analysis (CSRA) at the University of Connecticut (UConn) from fiscal years 2003 through 2008.  The purpose of this survey is to evaluate the services that clients received from the Vocational Rehabilitation Division at BESB. 

 

From July 30th through August 6th, 2012, CPPSR completed 66 interviews with BESB service recipients.  The sample, as well as the instrument, was provided by BESB.  Each client was called a minimum of five times. 

 

CPPSR is utilizing CSRA’s data to draw longitudinal comparisons.  For reasons not detailed in their report, CSRA states that results from fiscal year 2005 cannot be compared with data from other years.  Thus, data from 2005 does not appear in this analysis.  Keeping in line with past reports, references to each year (e.g., 2012, 2011, etc.) refers to the “Fiscal Year.”

 


Notable Findings for Fiscal Year 2012

 

A. Overall

 

In Fiscal Year 2012, BESB continued to receive high marks for their Vocational Rehabilitation Services and counselors.  More than nine out of ten clients (94%, up 2 percentage points) reported that they would recommend BESB Vocational Rehabilitation Services to a friend.  This figure matches the all-time high set in 2010.  We see substantial improvement in the favorability ratings of both services and counselors in 2012, offsetting much of the decline measured in last year’s survey.

 

Rehabilitation Equipment and Low Vision were the most widely-used services in 2012.  Rehabilitation Equipment Services saw a remarkable jump in use for both 2011 and 2010 (88% for both years, up 21 percentage points from 2009), a leap that began to taper in 2012 (79%, down 9 percentage points).   Use of Low Vision Services remained constant from 2011 figures (79%, down 1 percentage point).  Skills Training Services saw a slight bump in use (37%, up 2 percentage points), as did Small Business Services (11%, up 3 percentage points).

 

Three services saw a decline in use from last year.  The most dramatic downward shifts come in Reader Services (8%, down 22 percentage points), Higher Education Training Services (11%, down 15 percentage points), and Transportation Services (13%, down 13 percentage points).  Personal Care Attendant Services, the remaining service, also saw a small decrease in use (3%, down 5 percentage points).

 

B. Services

 

This year’s data reflect a rebound in satisfaction levels for many of BESB’s services.  Rehabilitation Equipment Services reached an all-time high in satisfaction rates (8.90, up 1.35 in mean rating).  Skills Training Services reached its second-highest rating in the history of this survey (8.69, up .83 in mean rating).  Low Vision Services also enjoyed a sizable jump in ratings (8.75, up 1.03 in mean rating), as did Personal Care Attendant Services (6.0, up 1.75 in mean rating).  Small Business Services registered the largest increase of all, reaching a three-year high (7.42, up 3.86 in mean rating).  There were two services that saw decreases in average satisfaction ratings.  Transportation Services suffered the largest decrease (6.0, down .75 in mean rating), while Reader Services saw a very small drop in satisfaction (7.4, drop of .12 in mean rating).  Higher Education Training Services saw no change in average client rating (5.0).

 

C. Counselors

 

Counselors, much like services, enjoyed an increase in satisfaction ratings for 2012.  Out of the nine dimensions of counselors that were rated, eight saw a boost in satisfaction numbers.  The remaining dimension saw no change from 2011 figures.

 

The dimension of counselors that received the highest rating in 2012 was their professionalism (9.0, up .37 in mean rating).  Aspects of counselors that saw big jumps in satisfaction levels included counselors’ ability to help clients understand their vocational rehabilitation rights (8.71, up .91 in mean rating), counselors’ ability to recognize clients’ special needs (8.60, up .55 in mean rating), clients’ satisfaction of referral (8.69, up .53 in mean rating), and counselors’ ability to develop clients’ IPE (8.08, up .38 in mean rating).  The largest increase in satisfaction came in counselors’ ability to identify the career goals of clients (8.36, up 1.01 in mean rating).

 

Dimensions of counselors that received more modest increases in satisfaction included the counselors’ ability to help clients understand the process for complaint resolution (7.76, up .14 in mean rating) and the overall knowledge of the counselor (8.54, up .31 in mean rating).  Satisfaction with counselors’ ability to provide information in a format that clients can use remained unchanged (7.70).


 

Frequency of BESB Services

 

Clients were asked what type of services they received from BESB.  They were then asked to evaluate these services on a 1 to 10 point satisfaction scale, where one means very dissatisfied and ten means highly satisfied. 

 

Rehabilitation Equipment and Low Vision were the most widely-used services in 2012.  Rehabilitation Equipment Services saw a remarkable jump in use for both 2011 and 2010 (88% for both years, up 21 percentage points from 2009), a leap that began to taper in 2012 (79%, down 9 percentage points).   Use of Low Vision Services remained constant from 2011 (79%, down 1 percentage point).  Skills Training Services saw a slight bump in use (37%, up 2 percentage points), as did Small Business Services (11%, up 3 percentage points).

 

Three services saw significant levels of decline from last year.  The most dramatic downward shifts come in the use of Reader Services (8%, down 22 percentage points), Higher Education Training Services (11%, down 15 percentage points), and Transportation Services (13%, down 13 percentage points).  Personal Care Attendant Services, the remaining service, also saw a small decrease in use (3%, down 5 percentage points).

 

Frequency of Services Received

 

Low Vision 2012

79%

Low Vision 2011

80%

Low Vision 2010

76%

Low Vision 2009

81%

Low Vision 2008

75%

Low Vision 2007

78%

Low Vision 2006

76%

Low Vision 2004

81%

Low Vision 2003

87%

 

Rehab Equipment 2012

79%

Rehab Equipment 2011

88%

Rehab Equipment 2010

88%

Rehab Equipment 2009

67%

Rehab Equipment 2008

73%

Rehab Equipment 2007

81%

Rehab Equipment 2006

75%

Rehab Equipment 2004

71%

Rehab Equipment 2003

71%

 

Skills Training 2012

37%

Skills Training 2011

35%

Skills Training 2010

47%

Skills Training 2009

23%

Skills Training 2008

32%

Skills Training 2007

27%

Skills Training 2006

32%

Skills Training 2004

29%

Skills Training 2003

31%

 

 

 

Reader 2012

8%

Reader 2011

30%

Reader 2010

22%

Reader 2009

13.5%

Reader 2008

15%

Reader 2007

18%

Reader 2006

32%

Reader 2004

29%

Reader 2003

31%

 

Higher Education Training 2012

11%

Higher Education Training 2011

26%

Higher Education Training 2010

20%

Higher Education Training 2009

17%

Higher Education Training 2008

14%

Higher Education Training 2007

21%

Higher Education Training 2006

20%

Higher Education Training 2004

11%

Higher Education Training 2003

14%

 

Transportation 2012

13%

Transportation 2011

26%

Transportation 2010

24.5%

Transportation 2009

17%

Transportation 2008

14%

Transportation 2007

14%

Transportation 2006

14%

Transportation 2004

16%

Transportation 2003

14%

 

Small Business 2012

11%

Small Business 2011

8%

Small Business 2010

16%

Small Business 2009

11.5%

Small Business 2008

11%

Small Business 2007

7%

Small Business 2006

14%

Small Business 2004

10%

Small Business 2003

9%

 

Personal Care Attendant 2012

3%

Personal Care Attendant 2011

8%

Personal Care Attendant 2010

2%

Personal Care Attendant 2009

6%

Personal Care Attendant 2008

5%

Personal Care Attendant 2007

2%

Personal Care Attendant 2006

7%

Personal Care Attendant 2004

11%

Personal Care Attendant 2003

12%


Mean Satisfaction Service Ratings

 

To measure the satisfaction of services received, clients were asked to rate each service on a 1 to 10 point scale.  A rating of “10” meant the client was “Very Satisfied” and a rating of “1” meant the client was “Very Dissatisfied.”  The mean scores for these ratings are reported below.  Clients who rated the services on the high (8-10) and low (1-3) end of the scale were asked a follow-up question about the reason for their rating.

 

Last year, clients reported decreasing levels of satisfaction across all services except one, Higher Education Services.  This year’s data reflect a rebound in satisfaction levels for many of these services.  Rehabilitation Equipment Services reached an all-time high in satisfaction rates (8.90, up 1.35 in mean rating).  Skills Training Services reached its second-highest rating in the history of this survey (8.69, up .83 in mean rating).  Low Vision Services enjoyed a sizable jump in ratings (8.75, up 1.03 in mean rating), as did Personal Care Attendant Services (6.0, up 1.75 in mean rating).  Small Business Services registered the largest increase of all, reaching a three-year high (7.42, up 3.86 in mean rating).

 

There were two services that saw drops in average satisfaction ratings.  Transportation Services suffered the largest decrease (6.0, down .75 in mean rating), while Reader Services saw a very small drop in satisfaction (7.4, drop of .12 in mean rating).  Higher Education Training Services saw no change in average client rating (5.0).

 

It is important to note the issue of sample size when reviewing these figures.  This is of particular relevance to Higher Education and Small Business Services.  Given the small sample sizes presented in these responses, one should not place too much significance on the changes in satisfaction for these particular services.

 

Mean Satisfaction Ratings

 

Transportation 2012

6.0

Transportation 2011

6.75

Transportation 2010

7.58

Transportation 2009

8.13

Transportation 2008

9.00

Transportation 2007

8.38

Transportation 2006

8.92

Transportation 2004

8.27

Transportation 2003

8.09

 

Reader 2012

7.4

Reader 2011

7.52

Reader 2010

8.36

Reader 2009

9.57

Reader 2008

9.00

Reader 2007

9.40

Reader 2006

8.44

Reader 2004

8.58

Reader 2003

8.89

 

 

 

Rehab Equipment 2012

8.90

Rehab Equipment 2011

7.55

Rehab Equipment 2010

8.88

Rehab Equipment 2009

8.80

Rehab Equipment 2008

8.62

Rehab Equipment 2007

8.43

Rehab Equipment 2006

8.38

Rehab Equipment 2004

8.76

Rehab Equipment 2003

8.68

 

 

Higher Education Training 2012

5.0

Higher Education Training 2011

5.0

Higher Education Training 2010

4.2

Higher Education Training 2009

8.33

Higher Education Training 2008

8.62

Higher Education Training 2007

7.79

Higher Education Training 2006

8.47

Higher Education Training 2004

8.07

Higher Education Training 2003

8.86

 

Low Vision 2012

8.75

Low Vision 2011

7.72

Low Vision 2010

8.25

Low Vision 2009

7.79

Low Vision 2008

8.47

Low Vision 2007

8.87

Low Vision 2006

8.65

Low Vision 2004

8.95

Low Vision 2003

8.89

 

Skills Training 2012

8.69

Skills Training 2011

7.96

Skills Training 2010

8.87

Skills Training 2009

7.92

Skills Training 2008

8.47

Skills Training 2007

8.50

Skills Training 2006

7.89

Skills Training 2004

8.41

Skills Training 2003

8.62

 

Personal Care Attendant 2012

6.0

Personal Care Attendant 2011

4.25

Personal Care Attendant 2010

8.00

Personal Care Attendant 2009

9.00

Personal Care Attendant 2008

7.80

Personal Care Attendant 2007

10.00

Personal Care Attendant 2006

9.33

Personal Care Attendant 2004

8.87

Personal Care Attendant 2003

8.45

 

 

Small Business 2012

7.43

Small Business 2011

3.57

Small Business 2010

7.33

Small Business 2009

8.17

Small Business 2008

7.78

Small Business 2007

8.33

Small Business 2006

7.75

Small Business 2004

6.71

Small Business 2003

7.00

 


Low Vision Services

 

Low Vision Services showed a notable increase in the number of clients reporting high levels of satisfaction (rating of 8-10) in 2012.  Nearly seven out of eight respondents reported high satisfaction numbered (85%, up 13 percentage points) since 2011, while reports of low satisfaction (rating of 1-3) decreased by 10 percentage points (7%).  The number of clients reporting an average satisfaction range (rating of 4-7) has continued to steadily decrease since 2009.  Respondents falling into this category now number less than one in ten (8%, down 3 percentage points).

 

Three reasons were identified for low satisfaction ratings.  One-third (33.3%) felt that the service did not meet their needs and/or expectations.  The same number of clients (33.3%) reported that the quality of the product was poor.  The remaining third (33.3%) reported that the service was not timely.  One client commented, "BESB was great but my doctor was not.”  Another reported that, “My doctor was not as thorough as times in the past.”

 

Of those clients offering positive reviews of LVS, two in five (41%) cited that the service met their needs and/or expectations.  Slightly more than one-third (36%) reported that the provider was knowledgeable and/or caring.  The remainder felt that the service was timely (10%), that access to the service was coordinated effectively (5%), or gave other reasons (5%).  One respondent offered that, “my doctor was very helpful.”  Another commented that, “my doctor took a personal interest in what I was doing.”

 

How satisfied were you with Low Vision Services?
2003 n=142, 2004 n=114, 2006 n=64, 2007 n=69, 2008 n=71, 2009 n =34, 2010 n=32,

2011 n=54, 2012 n=40

 

1-3 Rating 2012

7%

1-3 Rating 2011

17%

1-3 Rating 2010

0%

1-3 Rating 2009

9%

1-3 Rating 2008

6%

1-3 Rating 2007

0%

1-3 Rating 2006

3%

1-3 Rating 2004

3%

1-3 Rating 2003

4%

 

4-7 Rating 2012

8%

4-7 Rating 2011

11%

4-7 Rating 2010

13%

4-7 Rating 2009

30%

4-7 Rating 2008

15%

4-7 Rating 2007

19%

4-7 Rating 2006

20%

4-7 Rating 2004

11%

4-7 Rating 2003

8%

 


 

8-10 Rating 2012

85%

8-10 Rating 2011

72%

8-10 Rating 2010

87%

8-10 Rating 2009

61%

8-10 Rating 2008

77%

8-10 Rating 2007

81%

8-10 Rating 2006

77%

8-10 Rating 2004

85%

8-10 Rating 2003

88%


Rehabilitation Technology and Adaptive Equipment Services

 

This year, client satisfaction with Rehabilitation Technology and Adaptive Equipment Services returned to the nine-year high recorded in 2010.  Nearly nine out of ten service recipients (86%, up 20 percentage points) offered high rates of satisfaction.  No clients (0%, down 11 percentage points) reported low satisfaction ratings.  Neutral satisfactory ratings saw a sizable downturn (14%, down 9 percentage points).

 

Half (50%) of clients expressing high levels of dissatisfaction cited that the service was not timely.  One in four (25%) reported no follow up.  The remainder (25%) offered other reasons.   One client who gave an alternate response commented, "It was unclear to me what was available and what I could ask for as an adult BESB client.”  Another said, “The service was overbooked.”

 

Of clients who voiced high levels of satisfaction, over half (54%) cited that the service met their needs and/or expectations.  Just shy of one-quarter (23%) noted that the provider was knowledgeable and/or caring.  Other reasons for high satisfaction included timely service (9%), other reasons (6%), and effectively coordinated access to the service (4%), One individual commented, “This service helps tremendously to allow me to continue working.”  Another offered, “I never felt rushed.”

 

How satisfied were you with Rehabilitation Technology and Adaptive Equipment Services?

2003 n=113, 2004 n=114, 2006 n=60, 2007 n=72, 2008 n=69, 2009 n= 35, 2010 n=42,

2011 n =65, 2012 n=50

 

1-3 Rating 2012

0%

1-3 Rating 2011

11%

1-3 Rating 2010

0%

1-3 Rating 2009

0%

1-3 Rating 2008

3%

1-3 Rating 2007

4%

1-3 Rating 2006

0%

1-3 Rating 2004

3%

1-3 Rating 2003

2%

 

4-7 Rating 2012

14%

4-7 Rating 2011

23%

4-7 Rating 2010

14%

4-7 Rating 2009

20%

4-7 Rating 2008

12%

4-7 Rating 2007

17%

4-7 Rating 2006

27%

4-7 Rating 2004

14%

4-7 Rating 2003

16%

 

 

8-10 Rating 2012

86%

8-10 Rating 2011

66%

8-10 Rating 2010

86%

8-10 Rating 2009

80%

8-10 Rating 2008

84%

8-10 Rating 2007

79%

8-10 Rating 2006

73%

8-10 Rating 2004

83%

8-10 Rating 2003

80%

 


Skills Training Services

 

The 2012 survey indicated notable improvements in the review of Skills Training Services.  Four out of five clients (79%; up 5 percentage points) reported high levels of satisfaction.  The number of clients offering a low level of satisfaction fell considerably (3%, down 8 percentage points from 11%).  Just shy of one out of five clients (18%, up 3 percentage points) indicated average levels of satisfaction.

 

Two out of three (66.6%) clients who reported low levels of satisfaction volunteered reasons not offered in the standard survey choices.  The remaining third (33.3%) felt that their needs were ignored.  One of the clients volunteering a response noted, “BESB should have done a better job with placement and recruiting.”  Another stated, “The provider was knowledgeable.  However, the scheduling and rescheduling of appointments have been challenging.”

 

Reasons cited for high levels of satisfaction varied considerably.  More than four in ten (45%) stated that the provider was knowledgeable and/or caring.  Two in five (40%) noted that the service met their needs and/or expectations.  One in ten (10%) noted that the service was timely.  One client offered, “I learned what I need to know.”  Another mentioned, “The training taught me how to be independent.”

 

How satisfied were you with Skills Training Services?

2003 n=50, 2004 n=41, 2006 n=27, 2007 n=24, 2008 n=30, 2009 n=13, 2010 n=23, 2011 n=28, 2012 n=23

 

1-3 Rating 2012

3%

1-3 Rating 2011

11%

1-3 Rating 2010

0%

1-3 Rating 2009

8%

1-3 Rating 2008

3%

1-3 Rating 2007

4%

1-3 Rating 2006

4%

1-3 Rating 2004

5%

1-3 Rating 2003

4%

 

4-7 Rating 2012

18%

4-7 Rating 2011

15%

4-7 Rating 2010

17%

4-7 Rating 2009

23%

4-7 Rating 2008

17%

4-7 Rating 2007

25%

4-7 Rating 2006

33%

4-7 Rating 2004

19%

4-7 Rating 2003

18%

 

 

8-10 Rating 2012

79%

8-10 Rating 2011

74%

8-10 Rating 2010

83%

8-10 Rating 2009

61%

8-10 Rating 2008

80%

8-10 Rating 2007

71%

8-10 Rating 2006

63%

8-10 Rating 2004

76%

8-10 Rating 2003

78%

 

 


Higher Education Training Services

 

The ratings for Higher Education Training Services indicated a more positive reception than the 2011 findings.  High levels of satisfaction increased to a ratio of nearly three out of five respondents (57%, up 14 percentage points).  There was a clear shift away from low satisfaction ratings, with more clients offering average and high satisfaction responses.  Most notably, none of the clients reported low satisfaction scores (0%, down 48 percentage points).  This represents a marked improvement over the 2011 findings, in which nearly half of the clients surveyed offered low satisfaction scores.  Slightly more than two in five (43%) offered neutral ratings of the service. 

 

Given that no clients offered low satisfaction ratings of Higher Education Training Services, the low satisfaction follow-up question was not asked.  

 

Clients cited a number of reasons for their high level of satisfaction with Higher Education Training Services.  One-third (33%) stated that the service met their needs and/or expectations.  An identical number (33%) found the service to be timely.  Just shy of one in five (17%) reported that access to the service was coordinated effectively, while the remainder (17%) volunteered alternate responses.  One client reported that, “Funding was available to get me all the way through my college education.” 

 

A few new survey questions were added in 2011 regarding Higher Education Training Services.  For 2012, these questions revealed that nearly three-quarters (71%, down 15 percentage points) participated in a traditional college program.  Slightly less than three in ten (29%, up 15 percentage points) received vocational program training.  Fewer clients are attending school full time.  In 2012, just shy of three in five (57%, down fourteen percentage points) participated as a full time student.  An increasing number (43%, up 17 percentage points) described themselves as part time.  Graduation numbers dropped precipitously from last year.  Just over two in five (43%) reported that they graduated, a decline of 46 percentage points from 2011.  The remainder (57%) stated that they did not graduate, an increase of 48 percentage points from last year.

 

How satisfied were you with Higher Education Training Services?

2003 n=22, 2004 n=15, 2006 n=17, 2007 n=19, 2008 n=13, 2009 n=10, 2010 n=10, 2011 n=35, 2012=7

 

1-3 Rating 2012

0%

1-3 Rating 2011

48%

1-3 Rating 2010

40%

1-3 Rating 2009

11%

1-3 Rating 2008

0%

1-3 Rating 2007

0%

1-3 Rating 2006

0%

1-3 Rating 2004

0%

1-3 Rating 2003

0%

 

 

4-7 Rating 2012

43%

4-7 Rating 2011

6%

4-7 Rating 2010

50%

4-7 Rating 2009

11%

4-7 Rating 2008

8%

4-7 Rating 2007

26%

4-7 Rating 2006

24%

4-7 Rating 2004

33%

4-7 Rating 2003

23%

 

8-10 Rating 2012

57%

8-10 Rating 2011

43%

8-10 Rating 2010

10%

8-10 Rating 2009

78%

8-10 Rating 2008

92%

8-10 Rating 2007

74%

8-10 Rating 2006

77%

8-10 Rating 2004

67%

8-10 Rating 2003

73%

 

 


Reader Services

 

Reader Services saw a notable drop in satisfaction levels for 2012.  Only three in five clients (60%) reported high levels of satisfaction, a drop of fourteen percentage points from last year.  Many of these clients shifted to a more neutral rating.  This response category spiked up sixteen percentage points from 2011 (20% in 2012 compared to 4% in 2011).  Dissatisfied ratings remained consistent with last year’s findings, with one in five (20%, down 2 percentage points) clients providing negative reviews.  The 2012 data point to the possible emergence of a new trend in dissatisfactory reviews.  In 2011, dissatisfactory ratings hit a new low (22%, up 22 percentage points from 2010).  This elevated level of dissatisfaction continued in 2012.  This is a notable trend considering that zero clients reported low levels of satisfaction from 2004 through 2010.  However, given the historically low sample size with this question, it is difficult to draw firm conclusions.

 

Only one client expressed why he/she was dissatisfied with Reader Services.  This client stated, “I was happy with the funding, but I had to do research to find my own reader.” 

 

Of those reporting high levels of satisfaction, two-thirds (66.6%) noted that access to the service was coordinated effectively.  The remaining third (33.3%) mentioned that the service met their needs and/or expectations.  Again, it is worth noting the low sample size.  Only three clients offered reasons for their satisfactory ratings.

 

How satisfied were you with Reader Services?

2003 n=22, 2004 n=15, 2006 n=9, 2007 n=15, 2008 n=14, 2009 n=7, 2010 n=11, 2011 n=23, 2012 n=5

 

1-3 Rating 2012

20%

1-3 Rating 2011

22%

1-3 Rating 2010

0%

1-3 Rating 2009

0%

1-3 Rating 2008

0%

1-3 Rating 2007

0%

1-3 Rating 2006

0%

1-3 Rating 2004

0%

1-3 Rating 2003

7%

 

4-7 Rating 2012

20%

4-7 Rating 2011

4%

4-7 Rating 2010

0%

4-7 Rating 2009

0%

4-7 Rating 2008

29%

4-7 Rating 2007

0%

4-7 Rating 2006

22%

4-7 Rating 2004

27%

4-7 Rating 2003

10%

 

 

8-10 Rating 2012

60%

8-10 Rating 2011

74%

8-10 Rating 2010

100%

8-10 Rating 2009

100%

8-10 Rating 2008

64%

8-10 Rating 2007

100%

8-10 Rating 2006

78%

8-10 Rating 2004

73%

8-10 Rating 2003

79%

 


Transportation Services for Training Programs or Employment

 

The number of clients reporting high levels of satisfaction with Transportation Services dropped considerably from 2011(37.5%, down 14.5 percentage points).  The service saw a rise in both neutral and low satisfaction ratings.  Almost two in five clients (37.5%) offered a neutral rating, a 13.5 percentage point increase from last year.  One in four clients (25%, up 6 percentage points) issued a low satisfaction rating, an all-time high for Transportation Services. 

 

In identifying the reason for low satisfaction, clients were evenly split among three answer choices.  One-third (33.3%) cited that the quality of the product was poor.   Another third (33.3%) mentioned lack of transportation.  The remaining third (33.3) identified that the service was not timely.  One respondent added, “Pick-up times were sometimes off by an hour or more.”

 

Looking at the reasons for high levels of satisfaction, half (50%) of all clients cited that the service met their needs and/or expectations.  One in four (25%) mentioned that the service was timely, while the remaining quarter (25%) pinpointed that access to the service was coordinated effectively.  One client offered a positive rating but added, “I wish that Connecticut Transit and BESB would work together.”

 

How satisfied were you with Transportation Services for Training Programs or Employment? 2003 n=23, 2004 n=22, 2006 n=12, 2007 n=13, 2008 n=13, 2009 n=8, 2010 n=12, 2011 n =21, 2012 n=8

 

1-3 Rating 2012

25%

1-3 Rating 2011

19%

1-3 Rating 2010

8%

1-3 Rating 2009

0%

1-3 Rating 2008

0%

1-3 Rating 2007

0%

1-3 Rating 2006

0%

1-3 Rating 2004

9%

1-3 Rating 2003

4%

 

4-7 Rating 2012

37.5%

4-7 Rating 2011

24%

4-7 Rating 2010

42%

4-7 Rating 2009

37.5%

4-7 Rating 2008

15%

4-7 Rating 2007

31%

4-7 Rating 2006

8%

4-7 Rating 2004

14%

4-7 Rating 2003

35%

 

8-10 Rating 2012

37.5%

8-10 Rating 2011

52%

8-10 Rating 2010

50%

8-10 Rating 2009

62.5%

8-10 Rating 2008

77%

8-10 Rating 2007

69%

8-10 Rating 2006

92%

8-10 Rating 2004

77%

8-10 Rating 2003

61%


Personal Care Attendant Services

 

The 2012 results for Personal Care Attendant Services were equally polarized between low and high satisfaction ratings.  Reports of high satisfaction remained consistent with 2011 figures (50%, zero change).  However, we also observe that low satisfaction ratings doubled in size (50%, up 25 percentage points) from the 2011 recorded values.  This figure represents an all-time high for Personal Care Attendant Services.  Zero clients issued a neutral rating for the service.  It is worth noting that a very small percentage of BESB clients reported received this service in 2012 (3%).  This small sample size should be taken into consideration when reflecting on the shift in satisfaction ratings.

 

One client offered an explanation for his/her low satisfaction ratings, mentioning that the service was not timely.  Similarly, only one client offered an explanation for his/her high satisfaction rating.  This person noted that the service was timely.  This individual went on to mention that, “they were extra careful and I felt safe.”  The small response rate of these follow-up questions is notable. 

 

How satisfied were you with Personal Care Attendant Services?

2003 n=23, 2004 n=22, 2006 n=6, 2007 n=2, 2008 n=5, 2009 n=3, 2010 n=1, 2011 n=8, 2012 n=2

 

1-3 Rating 2012

50%

1-3 Rating 2011

25%

1-3 Rating 2010

0%

1-3 Rating 2009

0%

1-3 Rating 2008

0%

1-3 Rating 2007

0%

1-3 Rating 2006

0%

1-3 Rating 2004

6%

1-3 Rating 2003

5%

 

4-7 Rating 2012

0%

4-7 Rating 2011

25%

4-7 Rating 2010

0%

4-7 Rating 2009

33%

4-7 Rating 2008

40%

4-7 Rating 2007

0%

4-7 Rating 2006

0%

4-7 Rating 2004

7%

4-7 Rating 2003

15%

 

8-10 Rating 2012

50%

8-10 Rating 2011

50%

8-10 Rating 2010

100%

8-10 Rating 2009

67%

8-10 Rating 2008

60%

8-10 Rating 2007

100%

8-10 Rating 2006

100%

8-10 Rating 2004

87%

8-10 Rating 2003

80%

 

 


Small Business Ventures Services

 

Reports of high satisfaction from BESB’s Small Business Venture Services saw a substantial increase, nearly doubling from last year’s value (43%, up 18 percentage points).  While this boost in satisfaction is positive, the figures still represent the second-lowest rating for this category since the survey’s inception.  Notably, Small Business Venture Services received no low satisfaction ratings in 2012 (0%, down 50 percentage points).  Neutral ratings jumped to an all-time high (57%, up 32 percentage points).  As with some of the other services, it is difficult to draw any firm conclusions from these developments due to the historically low number of responses (n=7 in 2012).  This question has attracted ten responses or less since 2007.

 

One client elected to elaborate on the reason for a dissatisfactory rating, citing that his/her needs were ignored.  Out of those reporting high levels of satisfaction, half (50%) mentioned that the service met their needs and/or expectations.  One in four (25%) offered that the provider was knowledgeable and/or caring.  The remainder (25%) provided an alternate response.  One of these respondents elaborated, “I was dealing with great people and access to help was always available.”

 

How satisfied were you with Small Business Ventures Services?

2003 n=15, 2004 n=14, 2006 n=12, 2007 n=6, 2008 n=10, 2009 n=6, 2010 n=9, 2011 n=8, 2012 n=7

 

1-3 Rating 2012

0%

1-3 Rating 2011

50%

1-3 Rating 2010

11%

1-3 Rating 2009

0%

1-3 Rating 2008

0%

1-3 Rating 2007

0%

1-3 Rating 2006

8%

1-3 Rating 2004

21%

1-3 Rating 2003

13%

 

4-7 Rating 2012

57%

4-7 Rating 2011

25%

4-7 Rating 2010

33%

4-7 Rating 2009

33%

4-7 Rating 2008

40%

4-7 Rating 2007

33%

4-7 Rating 2006

33%

4-7 Rating 2004

22%

4-7 Rating 2003

34%

 

8-10 Rating 2012

43%

8-10 Rating 2011

25%

8-10 Rating 2010

56%

8-10 Rating 2009

67%

8-10 Rating 2008

50%

8-10 Rating 2007

67%

8-10 Rating 2006

58%

8-10 Rating 2004

57%

8-10 Rating 2003

53%

 


BESB Counselor Ratings

 

Counselors, much like services, enjoyed an increase in ratings for 2012.  Out of the nine dimensions of counselors that were rated, eight saw a boost in numbers.  The final dimension saw no change from 2011 ratings.

 

The dimension of counselors that received the highest rating in 2012 was their professionalism (9.0, up .37 in mean rating).  Aspects of counselors that saw big jumps in satisfaction levels included counselors’ ability to help clients understand their vocational rehabilitation rights (8.71, up .91 in mean rating), counselors’ ability to recognize clients’ special needs (8.60, up .55 in mean rating), clients’ satisfaction of referral (8.69, up .53 in mean rating), and counselors’ ability to develop clients’ IPE (8.08, up .38 in mean rating).  The largest increase in satisfaction came in counselors’ ability to identify the career goals of clients (8.36, up 1.01 in mean rating).

 

Dimensions of counselors that received more modest increases in satisfaction included the counselors’ ability to help clients understand the process for complaint resolution (7.76, up .14 in mean rating) and the overall knowledge of the counselor (8.54, up .31 in mean rating).  Satisfaction with counselors’ ability to provide information in a format that clients can use remained unchanged (7.70).

 

 

Mean Counselor Ratings

 

Professionalism of Counselor 2012

9.0

Professionalism of Counselor 2011

8.63

Professionalism of Counselor 2010

9.16

Professionalism of Counselor 2009

9.12

Professionalism of Counselor 2008

8.68

Professionalism of Counselor 2007

8.83

Professionalism of Counselor 2006

9.19

Professionalism of Counselor 2004

9.13

Professionalism of Counselor 2003

9.01

 

Knowledge of Counselor 2012

8.54

Knowledge of Counselor 2011

8.23

Knowledge of Counselor 2010

8.88

Knowledge of Counselor 2009

8.86

Knowledge of Counselor 2008

8.36

Knowledge of Counselor 2007

8.51

Knowledge of Counselor 2006

8.84

Knowledge of Counselor 2004

8.9

Knowledge of Counselor 2003

8.68

 

Satisfaction of Referral 2012

8.69

Satisfaction of Referral 2011

8.16

Satisfaction of Referral 2010

8.49

Satisfaction of Referral 2009

8.34

Satisfaction of Referral 2008

8.2

Satisfaction of Referral 2007

8.80

Satisfaction of Referral 2006

8.42

Satisfaction of Referral 2004

8.67

Satisfaction of Referral 2003

8.5

 

Provide information in the format you use 2012

7.70

Provide information in the format you use 2011

7.70

Provide information in the format you use 2010

8.86

Provide information in the format you use 2009

8.03

Provide information in the format you use 2008

8.06

Provide information in the format you use 2007

8.78

Provide information in the format you use 2006

8.57

Provide information in the format you use 2004

8.53

Provide information in the format you use 2003

8.3

 

Understand your Vocational Rehabilitation Rights 2012

8.71

Understand your Vocational Rehabilitation Rights 2011

7.8

Understand your Vocational Rehabilitation Rights 2010

8.42

Understand your Vocational Rehabilitation Rights 2009

8.39

Understand your Vocational Rehabilitation Rights 2008

7.64

Understand your Vocational Rehabilitation Rights 2007

8.3

Understand your Vocational Rehabilitation Rights 2006

8.09

Understand your Vocational Rehabilitation Rights 2004

8.2

Understand your Vocational Rehabilitation Rights 2003

8.07

 

Develop your IPE 2012

8.08

Develop your IPE 2011

7.70

Develop your IPE 2010

8.05

Develop your IPE 2009

7.83

Develop your IPE 2008

7.62

Develop your IPE 2007

8.06

Develop your IPE 2006

7.87

Develop your IPE 2004

7.9

Develop your IPE 2003

7.8

 

Recognize your special needs 2012

8.60

Recognize your special needs 2011

8.05

Recognize your special needs 2010

8.49

Recognize your special needs 2009

7.22

Recognize your special needs 2008

7.56

Recognize your special needs 2007

8.12

Recognize your special needs 2006

8.03

Recognize your special needs 2004

8.05

Recognize your special needs 2003

7.84

 

Identify your career goals 2012

8.36

Identify your career goals 2011

7.35

Identify your career goals 2010

7.94

Identify your career goals 2009

7.47

Identify your career goals 2008

7.43

Identify your career goals 2007

7.71

Identify your career goals 2006

7.75

Identify your career goals 2004

7.88

Identify your career goals 2003

7.47

 

 

Understand the process for complaint resolution 2012

7.76

Understand the process for complaint resolution 2011

7.62

Understand the process for complaint resolution 2010

7.64

Understand the process for complaint resolution 2009

7.82

Understand the process for complaint resolution 2008

7.12

Understand the process for complaint resolution 2007

7.83

Understand the process for complaint resolution 2006

7.51

Understand the process for complaint resolution 2004

7.95

Understand the process for complaint resolution 2003

7.52

 


Helping Develop an Individualized Plan for Employment (IPE)

 

Overall, this year’s findings remained consistent with the 2011 survey.  Clients continued to report high satisfaction ratings towards their counselor’s assistance in developing an IPE.  Just shy of three in five (59%, down 2 percentage points) reported high levels of satisfaction.  This figure represents the second highest rating recorded in the history of the survey. The number of clients offering average ratings saw a small downtick (18%, down 4 percentage points), while the number reporting low levels of satisfaction fell marginally (7%, down 1 percentage point). 

 

A number of reasons were cited for client dissatisfaction.  One in four (25%) reported that the service did not meet their needs and/or expectations.  The same number (25%) felt that their needs were ignored.  Slightly more than one in ten (12.5%) felt that the service was not timely.  Nearly two in five (37.5%) gave alternate reasons.  One respondent mentioned, “My counselor was too quick to close my case.”  Another stated, “My counselor never took the time to fully make me aware of what services were available to me.”

 

Reasons for satisfaction also varied considerably.  A strong majority (61%) of satisfied clients claimed that the provider was knowledgeable and/or caring.  Nearly one in five (18%) felt that the service met their needs and/or expectations.  Others cited that the service was timely (9%), that access to the service was coordinated effectively (5%), or provided an alternate reason for their satisfaction (5%).  One respondent commented, “My counselor put a lot of effort into helping me get a job.”  Another responded, “Sometimes the service was not timely at all, but things eventually got done.”

 

…helping you to develop your Individualized Plan for Employment, or IPE?

2003 n=163, 2004 n=141, 2006 n=85, 2007 n=90, 2008 n=95, 2009 n=52, 2010 n=45, 2011 =74, 2012 n=63

 

1-3 Rating 2012

7%

1-3 Rating 2011

8%

1-3 Rating 2010

2%

1-3 Rating 2009

4%

1-3 Rating 2008

11%

1-3 Rating 2007

8%

1-3 Rating 2006

7%

1-3 Rating 2004

4%

1-3 Rating 2003

6%

 

4-7 Rating 2012

18%

4-7 Rating 2011

22%

4-7 Rating 2010

33%

4-7 Rating 2009

17%

4-7 Rating 2008

9%

4-7 Rating 2007

13%

4-7 Rating 2006

15%

4-7 Rating 2004

14%

4-7 Rating 2003

14%

 

8-10 Rating 2012

59%

8-10 Rating 2011

61%

8-10 Rating 2010

47%

8-10 Rating 2009

46%

8-10 Rating 2008

52%

8-10 Rating 2007

58%

8-10 Rating 2006

57%

8-10 Rating 2004

44%

8-10 Rating 2003

42%

 

DK/Ref 2012

16%

DK/Ref 2011

9%

DK/Ref 2010

18%

DK/Ref 2009

33%

DK/Ref 2008

28%

DK/Ref 2007

21%

DK/Ref 2006

21%

DK/Ref 2004

38%

DK/Ref 2003

38%

 

 


Identifying Career Goals

 

Client satisfaction of BESB’s ability to help identify career goals saw a moderate boost from 2011 figures.  Over half of all clients (53%, up 7 percentage points) reported high levels of satisfaction.  Both neutral and low ratings went down.  Neutral ratings numbered less than one in ten (7%, down 12 percentage points), the lowest neutral rating recorded in the history of the survey.  Low satisfaction levels saw a modest decrease from last year (7%, down 4 percentage points).  Notably, one in three (33%, up 9 percentage points) reported that they did not know the answer to the question and/or that the question did not apply to them.

 

Clients cited three main reasons for their dissatisfaction.  Half (50%) reported that there was no follow-up.  One-quarter (25%) mentioned that the quality of the product was poor, while the remaining quarter (25%) said that the service did not meet their needs and/or expectations.  One client elaborated, “I wanted to open a business, had a business plan in hand, and haven’t hear anything back regarding the plan in over three months.”   Another respondent mentioned, “I had very high expectations for the program, but the program fell short.”

 

Of clients reporting high levels of satisfaction, almost three in five (57%) cited that the provider was knowledgeable and/or caring.  Just shy of one-quarter (23%) mentioned that the product met their needs and/or expectations (23%).  Other reasons for high satisfaction included that the service was timely (14%) and “other” reasons (3%).  One of the clients offering an alternate response offered, “My counselor did a great job.”

 

…helping you identify your career goals?

2003 n=163, 2004 n=141, 2006 n=85, 2007 n=90, 2008 n=95, 2009 n=52, 2010 n=41,

2011 n=74, 2012 n=58

 

1-3 Rating 2012

7%

1-3 Rating 2011

11%

1-3 Rating 2010

5%

1-3 Rating 2009

10%

1-3 Rating 2008

11%

1-3 Rating 2007

8%

1-3 Rating 2006

11%

1-3 Rating 2004

6%

1-3 Rating 2003

9%

 

4-7 Rating 2012

7%

4-7 Rating 2011

19%

4-7 Rating 2010

27%

4-7 Rating 2009

19%

4-7 Rating 2008

17%

4-7 Rating 2007

16%

4-7 Rating 2006

15%

4-7 Rating 2004

12%

4-7 Rating 2003

13%

 


 

8-10 Rating 2012

53%

8-10 Rating 2011

46%

8-10 Rating 2010

54%

8-10 Rating 2009

44%

8-10 Rating 2008

48%

8-10 Rating 2007

58%

8-10 Rating 2006

51%

8-10 Rating 2004

42%

8-10 Rating 2003

36%

 

DK/Ref 2012

33%

DK/Ref 2011

24%

DK/Ref 2010

14%

DK/Ref 2009

27%

DK/Ref 2008

24%

DK/Ref 2007

19%

DK/Ref 2006

24%

DK/Ref 2004

40%

DK/Ref 2003

42%

 


Recognizing Special Needs in Regards to Employment

 

Client ratings of BESB’s ability to recognize special needs in regards to employment saw some shifts from 2011.  High satisfaction levels remained identical to last year’s survey (58%, zero change).  However, the percentage of people offering neutral ratings decreased by 10 percentage points (8%).  Low satisfaction ratings saw a very small decline (3%).  Notably, the number of people who were unable or unwilling to answer the question saw a sizable spike (31%, up 12 percentage points).

 

Clients were equally divided between three explanations for their dissatisfaction with the service.  One-third (33%) cited that the service did not meet their needs and/or expectations.  One-third (33.3%) reported that the quality of the product was poor.  The remaining third (33.3%) provided alternate responses.  One of these individuals mentioned, “Budget cuts are hurting the program.”

 

A number of reasons were cited for high satisfaction.  Nearly three in five (59%) mentioned that the provider was knowledgeable and/or caring.  One in five (21%) identified that the service meet their needs and/or expectations.  Other reasons mentioned included that the service was timely (5%), that the follow up after the service was good (2.5%), that access to the service was coordinated effectively (2.5%).  Almost one in ten (8%) provided an alternate response.  One of these clients mentioned, “My counselor suggested ideas of potential employment that were available to me.  I was very satisfied with the options.”  A second client offered, “My counselor encouraged me to finish my degree and helped me get a temporary job while in school.”

 

…recognizing your special needs in regards to employment?

2003 n=163, 2004 n=141, 2006 n=85, 2007 n=90, 2008 n=95, 2009 n=52, 2010 n=35,

2011 n=74, 2012 n=62

 

1-3 Rating 2012

3%

1-3 Rating 2011

5%

1-3 Rating 2010

3%

1-3 Rating 2009

8%

1-3 Rating 2008

12%

1-3 Rating 2007

7%

1-3 Rating 2006

8%

1-3 Rating 2004

3%

1-3 Rating 2003

6%

 

 

4-7 Rating 2012

8%

4-7 Rating 2011

18%

4-7 Rating 2010

20%

4-7 Rating 2009

21%

4-7 Rating 2008

11%

4-7 Rating 2007

18%

4-7 Rating 2006

15%

4-7 Rating 2004

14%

4-7 Rating 2003

13%

 


 

8-10 Rating 2012

58%

8-10 Rating 2011

58%

8-10 Rating 2010

77%

8-10 Rating 2009

41%

8-10 Rating 2008

53%

8-10 Rating 2007

61%

8-10 Rating 2006

53%

8-10 Rating 2004

42%

8-10 Rating 2003

42%

 

DK/Ref 2012

31%

DK/Ref 2011

19%

DK/Ref 2010

0%

DK/Ref 2009

30%

DK/Ref 2008

25%

DK/Ref 2007

14%

DK/Ref 2006

24%

DK/Ref 2004

41%

DK/Ref 2003

39%

 


Understanding Vocational Rehabilitation Rights and Responsibilities

 

This year, two-thirds of all clients (66%, up 2 percentage points) were highly satisfied with their counselors’ ability to help clients recognize their VR rights and responsibilities.  This figure represents a slight increase from 2011 findings.  Neutral ratings dropped to a record low (11%, down 5 percentage points), and low satisfaction ratings dropped to zero (down 8 percentage points).  Slightly more than one in five (23%) were unable or unwilling to answer the question.

 

Given that no clients offered low ratings of their counselors’ ability to help clients recognize their VR rights and responsibilities, the low satisfaction follow-up question was not asked.  

 

Among those reporting high levels of satisfaction, the sizable majority (68%) cited that the provider was knowledgeable and/or caring.  Other reasons mentioned for high satisfaction included the service met clients’ needs and/or expectations (16%), that access to the service was coordinated effectively (7%), or that follow-up was good (2%).  Just shy of one in ten (7%) offered an alternate response.  One client mentioned, “My counselor explained things to me even though I was in a state of shock at being legally blind.”  Another client reported that, “All BESB employees seem to like their job.  My counselor helped me tremendously.” 

 

 

…help you understand your Vocational Rehabilitation Rights and responsibilities?

2003 n=163, 2004 n=141, 2006 n=85, 2007 n=90, 2008 n=95, 2009 n=52, 2010 n=47,

2011 n=74, n=62

 

1-3 Rating 2012

0%

1-3 Rating 2011

8%

1-3 Rating 2010

2%

1-3 Rating 2009

0%

1-3 Rating 2008

6%

1-3 Rating 2007

6%

1-3 Rating 2006

9%

1-3 Rating 2004

3%

1-3 Rating 2003

6%

 

4-7 Rating 2012

11%

4-7 Rating 2011

16%

4-7 Rating 2010

19%

4-7 Rating 2009

19%

4-7 Rating 2008

23%

4-7 Rating 2007

16%

4-7 Rating 2006

18%

4-7 Rating 2004

16%

4-7 Rating 2003

14%

 

8-10 Rating 2012

66%

8-10 Rating 2011

64%

8-10 Rating 2010

68%

8-10 Rating 2009

50%

8-10 Rating 2008

47%

8-10 Rating 2007

68%

8-10 Rating 2006

61%

8-10 Rating 2004

44%

8-10 Rating 2003

53%

 

 

DK/Ref 2012

23%

DK/Ref 2011

12%

DK/Ref 2010

11%

DK/Ref 2009

31%

DK/Ref 2008

23%

DK/Ref 2007

11%

DK/Ref 2006

12%

DK/Ref 2004

37%

DK/Ref 2003

37%

 


Understanding the Process for Formal Complaint Resolution

 

Client satisfaction ratings with their counselor’s explanations of the formal complaint resolution process saw a shift away from high levels of satisfaction.  The number of clients reporting high levels of satisfaction saw an 8% drop from 2011 numbers (30%).  An increasing number of clients moved to reporting neutral levels of satisfaction (18%, a 13% increase from 2011).  Those reporting low levels of satisfaction remained the same (5%).  One client noted, “I felt frustrated at the lack of progress on my business plan.”  Notably, a record-high three in five (60%) were unable or unwilling to answer the question.  It is likely that the question did not apply to many of these individuals.

 

 

…help you understand the process for formal complaint resolution?

2003 n=163, 2004 n=141, 2006 n=84, 2007 n=90, 2008 n=95, 2009 n=52, 2010 n=46,

2011 n=74

 

1-3 Rating 2012

5%

1-3 Rating 2011

5%

1-3 Rating 2010

4%

1-3 Rating 2009

2%

1-3 Rating 2008

8%

1-3 Rating 2007

8%

1-3 Rating 2006

10%

1-3 Rating 2004

8%

1-3 Rating 2003

9%

 

4-7 Rating 2012

5%

4-7 Rating 2011

18%

4-7 Rating 2010

19%

4-7 Rating 2009

21%

4-7 Rating 2008

20%

4-7 Rating 2007

17%

4-7 Rating 2006

17%

4-7 Rating 2004

8%

4-7 Rating 2003

14%

 

8-10 Rating 2012

30%

8-10 Rating 2011

38%

8-10 Rating 2010

37%

8-10 Rating 2009

41%

8-10 Rating 2008

34%

8-10 Rating 2007

56%

8-10 Rating 2006

45%

8-10 Rating 2004

41%

8-10 Rating 2003

42%

 

DK/Ref/NA 2012

60%

DK/Ref /NA 2011

39%

DK/Ref/ NA 2010

40%

DK/Ref/ NA 2009

36%

DK/Ref/NA 2008

38%

DK/Ref/NA 2007

20%

DK/Ref/NA 2006

29%

DK/Ref /NA 2004

43%

DK/Ref/NA 2003

35%

 

 

Information in the Format You Use

 

The number of clients reporting high levels of satisfaction with their counselor providing information in the format they can use saw a slight increase from 2011 (57%, up 2 percentage points).  The number of clients reporting low levels of satisfaction dropped considerably (5%, down 7 percentage points).  The number of clients offering average levels of satisfaction saw a small decrease (13%, down 3 percentage points).  A quarter of respondents (25%) did not answer the question.  This figure represents a notable increase from 2011 (25%, up 8 percentage points).

 

Of those reporting low levels of satisfaction, one in three (33%) felt that their needs were ignored.  Close to one in five (17%) cited that service did not meet their needs and/or expectations.  The remainder (50%) mentioned other reasons.  One individual noted that, “I used e-mail as a means of communicating, but logging in was very difficult for a completely blind person.” 

 

Clients reporting high levels of satisfaction cited a number of factors.  Nearly two in ten (39%) felt that the service met their needs and/or expectations.  A similar number (37%) reported that the provider was knowledgeable and/or caring.  Others mentioned that the service was timely (7%), follow up after the service was good (5%), and that access to the service was coordinated effectively (2%).  One in ten (10%) cited “other” reasons.  One client said, “Rocky Hill Public Library supplied plenty of audiotapes.”  Another client reported that, “my counselor facilitated outstanding referrals to outstanding counselors outside of BESB.’

 

 

…providing any information in the format you use?

2003 n=163, 2004 n=141, 2006 n=84, 2007 n=90, 2008 n=95, 2009 n=52, 2010 n=46, 2011 n=74, 2012 n=63

 

1-3 Rating 2012

5%

1-3 Rating 2011

12%

1-3 Rating 2010

2%

1-3 Rating 2009

5%

1-3 Rating 2008

8%

1-3 Rating 2007

1%

1-3 Rating 2006

5%

1-3 Rating 2004

4%

1-3 Rating 2003

6%

 

4-7 Rating 2012

13%

4-7 Rating 2011

16%

4-7 Rating 2010

11%

4-7 Rating 2009

13%

4-7 Rating 2008

14%

4-7 Rating 2007

13%

4-7 Rating 2006

11%

4-7 Rating 2004

9%

4-7 Rating 2003

12%

 


 

8-10 Rating 2012

57%

8-10 Rating 2011

55%

8-10 Rating 2010

66%

8-10 Rating 2009

49%

8-10 Rating 2008

59%

8-10 Rating 2007

68%

8-10 Rating 2006

68%

8-10 Rating 2004

57%

8-10 Rating 2003

57%

 

DK/Ref 2012

25%

DK/Ref 2011

17%

DK/Ref 2010

21%

DK/Ref 2009

33%

DK/Ref 2008

19%

DK/Ref 2007

18%

DK/Ref 2006

17%

DK/Ref 2004

30%

DK/Ref 2003

25%


Referrals Provided by Counselors

 

Client satisfaction with the referrals provided by their counselors saw a slight increase this year. More than three in five clients (68%) reported high levels of satisfaction (up 3 percentage points).  The number of clients reporting low levels of satisfaction dropped from last year (3%, down 6 percentage point).  Average satisfaction rates (10%, down 2 percentage points) remained consistent with 2011 figures.

 

A wide range of reasons were given for low satisfaction ratings.  An identical number of clients (17% for each respective reason) reported that the service did not meet their needs and/or expectations, that the quality of the product was poor, that there was no follow-up, and that their needs were ignored.  The remaining clients (33%) gave other reasons.  One client noted that, “Budget cuts have limited the amount of lessons and special services that are offered.”  Another client reported that, “As a student, the system works well.  However, after school, services become very vague for adults using BESB.”

 

Of those clients who expressed satisfaction, half (50%) felt that the provider was knowledgeable and/or caring.  One in five (22%) felt that the service met needs and/or expectations.  The reminder cited that the service was timely (14%), that access to the service was coordinated efficiently (5%), or provided “other” reasons (9%).  One client mentioned, “My instructor explained everything well.  He provided a great, passionate service.”  Another client reported that, “The man who helped me was an angel.  BESB has the best mobility person!”

 

...any referral provided by your counselor?

2003 n=163, 2004 n=141, 2006 n=84, 2007 n=90, 2008 n=95, 2009 n=52, 2010 n=46,

2011 n=74, 2012 n=63

 

1-3 Rating 2012

3%

1-3 Rating 2011

9%

1-3 Rating 2010

7%

1-3 Rating 2009

4%

1-3 Rating 2008

6%

1-3 Rating 2007

2%

1-3 Rating 2006

5%

1-3 Rating 2004

4%

1-3 Rating 2003

6%

 

4-7 Rating 2012

10%

4-7 Rating 2011

12%

4-7 Rating 2010

11%

4-7 Rating 2009

19%

4-7 Rating 2008

17%

4-7 Rating 2007

12%

4-7 Rating 2006

16%

4-7 Rating 2004

10%

4-7 Rating 2003

10%

 


 

8-10 Rating 2012

68%

8-10 Rating 2011

65%

8-10 Rating 2010

63%

8-10 Rating 2009

62%

8-10 Rating 2008

63%

8-10 Rating 2007

70%

8-10 Rating 2006

71%

8-10 Rating 2004

68%

8-10 Rating 2003

66%

 

DK/Ref /NA 2012

19%

DK/Ref /NA 2011

14%

DK/Ref/NA 2010

19%

DK/Ref/NA 2009

15%

DK/Ref/NA 2008

14%

DK/Ref/NA 2007

16%

DK/Ref/NA 2006

8%

DK/Ref/NA 2004

18%

DK/Ref/NA 2003

18%


The Knowledge of Counselors

 

Clients reported a small increase in levels of satisfaction regarding the knowledge of their counselors.  The number of people responding with high levels of satisfaction increased by 3 percentage points from 2011 (79%).  Nearly one in ten (8%, down 4 percentage points) reported average levels of satisfaction.  The figures for low levels of satisfaction remained consistent with last year (7%, down 1 percentage point).

 

How would you rate the knowledge of your counselor?

2003 n=163, 2004 n=141, 2006 n=84, 2007 n=90, 2008 n=95, 2009 n=52, 2010 n=45,

2011 n=74, 2012 n=61

 

1-3 Rating 2012

7%

1-3 Rating 2011

8%

1-3 Rating 2010

2%

1-3 Rating 2009

0%

1-3 Rating 2008

6%

1-3 Rating 2007

6%

1-3 Rating 2006

4%

1-3 Rating 2004

2%

1-3 Rating 2003

4%

 

4-7 Rating 2012

8%

4-7 Rating 2011

12%

4-7 Rating 2010

14%

4-7 Rating 2009

15%

4-7 Rating 2008

17%

4-7 Rating 2007

13%

4-7 Rating 2006

12%

4-7 Rating 2004

14%

4-7 Rating 2003

12%

 

8-10 Rating 2012

79%

8-10 Rating 2011

76%

8-10 Rating 2010

80%

8-10 Rating 2009

79%

8-10 Rating 2008

73%

8-10 Rating 2007

77%

8-10 Rating 2006

79%

8-10 Rating 2004

79%

8-10 Rating 2003

76%

 

DK/Ref 2012

6%

DK/Ref 2011

4%

DK/Ref 2010

4%

DK/Ref 2009

6%

DK/Ref 2008

4%

DK/Ref 2007

4%

DK/Ref 2006

6%

DK/Ref 2004

5%

DK/Ref 2003

8%


Professionalism of Counselors

 

Similar to prior years, satisfaction with the professionalism of counselors remains high.  There was a small increase in the number of people reporting high levels of satisfaction in 2012 (85%, up 2.5% percentage points).  This figure represents a six-year high. The number of clients reporting average levels of satisfaction dropped considerably (3%, down 8 percentage points).  There was a very slight increase in the number of clients citing low levels of satisfaction (5%, down .5 percentage points).  The number of respondents who were unable or unwilling to answer the question saw a modest uptick (7%, up 6 percentage points).

 

How would you rate the professionalism of your counselor?

2003 n=163, 2004 n=141, 2006 n=84, 2007 n=90, 2008 n=95, 2009 n=52, 2010 n=45,

2011 n=74, 2012 n=61

 

1-3 Rating 2012

5%

1-3 Rating 2011

5.5%

1-3 Rating 2010

2%

1-3 Rating 2009

0%

1-3 Rating 2008

5%

1-3 Rating 2007

3%

1-3 Rating 2006

0%

1-3 Rating 2004

2%

1-3 Rating 2003

3%

 

4-7 Rating 2012

3%

4-7 Rating 2011

11%

4-7 Rating 2010

14%

4-7 Rating 2009

13%

4-7 Rating 2008

15%

4-7 Rating 2007

13%

4-7 Rating 2006

11%

4-7 Rating 2004

9%

4-7 Rating 2003

12%

 

8-10 Rating 2012

85%

8-10 Rating 2011

82.5%

8-10 Rating 2010

84%

8-10 Rating 2009

81%

8-10 Rating 2008

78%

8-10 Rating 2007

79%

8-10 Rating 2006

86%

8-10 Rating 2004

85%

8-10 Rating 2003

74%

 

DK/Ref 2012

7%

DK/Ref 2011

1%

DK/Ref 2010

0%

DK/Ref 2009

6%

DK/Ref 2008

2%

DK/Ref 2007

4%

DK/Ref 2006

4%

DK/Ref 2004

4%

DK/Ref 2003

11%


Experience Working with Counselors

 

Ratings of experiences working with counselors remains high, with positive ratings seeing a small increase in 2012 (88%, up 2 percentage points).  Neutral ratings remained constant with last year’s figures (4%, zero change).  Negative ratings saw a very small decline (8%, down 2 percentage points).

 

Experience working with the counselor

2003 n=163, 2004 n=141, 2006 n=84, 2007 n=90, 2008 n=95, 2009 n=52, 2010 n=45,

2011 n=74, 2012 n=60

 

 

Positive Rating 2012

88%

Positive Rating 2011

86%

Positive Rating 2010

96%

Positive Rating 2009

88%

Positive Rating 2008

86%

Positive Rating 2007

87%

Positive Rating 2006

92%

Positive Rating 2004

92%

Positive Rating 2003

85%

 

Neutral Rating 2012

4%

Neutral Rating 2011

4%

Neutral Rating 2010

2%

Neutral Rating 2009

4%

Neutral Rating 2008

2%

Neutral Rating 2007

3%

Neutral Rating 2006

1%

Neutral Rating 2004

1%

Neutral Rating 2003

4%

 


 

Negative Rating 2012

8%

Negative Rating 2011

10%

Negative Rating 2010

2%

Negative Rating 2009

4%

Negative Rating 2008

11%

Negative Rating 2007

6%

Negative Rating 2006

6%

Negative Rating 2004

4%

Negative Rating 2003

4%

 

 

 

DK/Ref 2012

0%

DK/Ref 2011

0%

DK/Ref 2010

0%

DK/Ref 2009

4%

DK/Ref 2008

0%

DK/Ref 2007

3%

DK/Ref 2006

1%

DK/Ref 2004

3%

DK/Ref 2003

7%

 

 


Explanation of Delays

 

Of those clients who experienced delays in their service, almost four in five (78%, up 4 percentage points) reported that their counselor explained the delay to their satisfaction.  This figure represented a slight increase in satisfaction from 2011 figures.  There was also a small increase in the number of clients who were unable or unwilling to answer the question (4%, up 4 percentage points). 

 

Did your counselor explain to you the delays encountered in providing the services on time?

2003 n=108, 2004 n=111, 2006 n=60, 2007 n=78, 2008 n=81, 2009 n=50, 2010 n=45

2011 n=74, 2012 n=45

 

Yes 2012

78%

Yes 2011

74%

Yes 2010

86%

Yes 2009

91%

Yes 2008

75%

Yes 2007

74%

Yes 2006

85%

Yes 2004

75%

Yes 2003

75%

 

No 2012

18%

No 2011

11%

No 2010

8%

No 2009

6%

No 2008

21%

No 2007

19%

No 2006

12%

No 2004

16%

No 2003

18%

 

DK/Ref 2012

4%

DK/Ref 2011

0%

DK/Ref 2010

6%

DK/Ref 2009

3%

DK/Ref 2008

4%

DK/Ref 2007

6%

DK/Ref 2006

3%

DK/Ref 2004

9%

DK/Ref 2003

7%

 

 


Satisfaction with Services Arranged

 

Satisfaction with services arranged by counselors saw a sizable jump in 2012.  The percentage of respondents offering a satisfied rating increased noticeably from 2011 (93%, up 8 percentage points).  The number of clients reporting a dissatisfied rating remained constant from last year (7%, up 1 percentage point).  No clients offered a neutral rating (0%, down 5 percentage points).  Notably, all clients answered the question.

 

Overall, how satisfied were you with the services your counselor arranged for you?

2003 n=163, 2004 n=141, 2006 n=84, 2007 n=90, 2008 n=95, 2009 n=51, 2010 n=44,

2011 n=74, 2012 n=61

 

Satisfied Rating 2012

93%

Satisfied Rating 2011

85%

Satisfied Rating 2010

98%

Satisfied Rating 2009

79%

Satisfied Rating 2008

87%

Satisfied Rating 2007

83%

Satisfied Rating 2006

85%

Satisfied Rating 2004

85%

Satisfied Rating 2003

83%

 

Neutral Rating 2012

0%

Neutral Rating 2011

5%

Neutral Rating 2010

2%

Neutral Rating 2009

6%

Neutral Rating 2008

1%

Neutral Rating 2007

0%

Neutral Rating 2006

6%

Neutral Rating 2004

3%

Neutral Rating 2003

2%

 

 

Dissatisfied Rating 2012

7%

Dissatisfied Rating 2011

6%

Dissatisfied Rating 2010

0%

Dissatisfied Rating 2009

4%

Dissatisfied Rating 2008

9%

Dissatisfied Rating 2007

10%

Dissatisfied Rating 2006

7%

Dissatisfied Rating 2004

6%

Dissatisfied Rating 2003

7%

 

 

DK/Ref 2012

0%

DK/Ref 2011

4%

DK/Ref 2010

0%

DK/Ref 2009

11%

DK/Ref 2008

2%

DK/Ref 2007

7%

DK/Ref 2006

2%

DK/Ref 2004

6%

DK/Ref 2003

9%

 


Overall Satisfaction with BESB Services

 

Finally, clients were asked to rate their overall experiences with BESB on a 1 to 10 point scale, including their IPE, timeframe of delivery of service, and the extent to which the services provided met their expectations.  They were also asked, based on their personal experience, if they would recommend BESB to others.

 

Overall satisfaction with BESB enjoyed a modest boost in 2012, jumping .86 in its mean rating (8.4). Two of the three other areas surveyed also enjoyed upticks in mean satisfaction ratings.  Clients reported more favorable ratings towards BESB services meeting their IPE (7.93, up .68 in mean rating), as well as BESB services meeting their needs (8.16, up .98 in mean rating).

 

The only area to see a decrease in satisfaction this year was in the services meeting clients’ expectations (7.93, down .27 in mean rating). 

 

BESB Vocational Rehabilitation Services Mean Ratings

 

Overall satisfaction 2012

8.4

Overall satisfaction 2011

7.54

Overall satisfaction 2010

8.60

Overall satisfaction 2009

8.28

Overall satisfaction 2008

8.02

Overall satisfaction 2007

8.39

Overall satisfaction 2006

8.12

Overall satisfaction 2004

8.54

Overall satisfaction 2003

8.48

 

Services met expectations 2012

7.93

Services met expectations 2011

8.2

Services met expectations 2010

8.04

Services met expectations 2009

8.30

Services met expectations 2008

7.80

Services met expectations 2007

7.72

Services met expectations 2006

7.59

Services met expectations 2004

8.14

Services met expectations 2003

7.96

 

Services met your IPE 2012

7.93

Services met your IPE 2011

7.25

Services met your IPE 2010

8.33

Services met your IPE 2009

7.83

Services met your IPE 2008

7.69

Services met your IPE 2007

8.23

Services met your IPE 2006

7.39

Services met your IPE 2004

7.89

Services met your IPE 2003

7.69

 


 

Services met needs 2012

8.16

Services met needs 2011

7.18

Services met needs 2010

8.04

Services met needs 2009

7.73

Services met needs 2008

7.58

Services met needs 2007

8.06

Services met needs 2006

7.46

Services met needs 2004

7.91

Services met needs 2003

7.78

 

 


Extent that Services Met IPE

 

The percentage of clients reporting that the services exactly followed their IPE plan remained consistent with 2011 figures.  Slightly less than half of all clients (48%, up 1 percentage point) reported high levels of satisfaction.  The number of clients reporting low levels of satisfaction saw a drop (7%, down 8 percentage points).  Neutral satisfaction ratings remained consistent with 2011 figures (12%, down 2 percentage points).  Notably, the number of respondents who were unwilling or unable to answer the question increased from 2011 (33%, up 9 percentage points).  This is likely because the question did not apply to them.  

 

To what extent have the services you received met your Individualized Plan for Employment (IPE)?

2003 n=163, 2004 n=141, 2006 n=84, 2007 n=90, 2008 n=95, n=52, 2010 n=45,

2011 n=74, 2012 n=60

 

1-3 Rating 2012

7%

1-3 Rating 2011

15%

1-3 Rating 2010

4%

1-3 Rating 2009

4%

1-3 Rating 2008

8%

1-3 Rating 2007

4%

1-3 Rating 2006

10%

1-3 Rating 2004

9%

1-3 Rating 2003

7%

 

4-7 Rating 2012

12%

4-7 Rating 2011

14%

4-7 Rating 2010

13%

4-7 Rating 2009

17%

4-7 Rating 2008

16%

4-7 Rating 2007

19%

4-7 Rating 2006

23%

4-7 Rating 2004

11%

4-7 Rating 2003

9%

 

8-10 Rating 2012

48%

8-10 Rating 2011

47%

8-10 Rating 2010

56%

8-10 Rating 2009

46%

8-10 Rating 2008

47%

8-10 Rating 2007

56%

8-10 Rating 2006

44%

8-10 Rating 2004

45%

8-10 Rating 2003

39%

 

DK/Ref 2012

33%

DK/Ref 2011

24%

DK/Ref 2010

11%

DK/Ref 2009

33%

DK/Ref 2008

28%

DK/Ref 2007

21%

DK/Ref 2006

24%

DK/Ref 2004

35%

DK/Ref 2003

45%

 

 

Extent Vocational Rehabilitation Services Met Needs

 

Client ratings on the extent to which Vocational Rehabilitation Services met their needs saw positive movement from 2011.  The number of respondents offering high levels of satisfaction jumped up 7 percentage points from last year’s figure (64%).  The number of clients citing average satisfaction dropped considerably (16.5%, down 6.5 percentage points).  Most notably, reports of low levels of satisfaction reached an all-time low (3%, down 14 percentage points). 

 

To what extent did Vocational Rehabilitation Services meet your needs?

2003 n=163, 2004 n=141, 2006 n=84, 2007 n=90, 2008 n=95, 2009 n=52, 2010 n=44,

2011 n=74, 2012 n=61

 

1-3 Rating 2011

3%

1-3 Rating 2011

17%

1-3 Rating 2010

5%

1-3 Rating 2009

10%

1-3 Rating 2008

9%

1-3 Rating 2007

8%

1-3 Rating 2006

11%

1-3 Rating 2004

8%

1-3 Rating 2003

9%

 

4-7 Rating 2012

16.5%

4-7 Rating 2011

23%

4-7 Rating 2010

22%

4-7 Rating 2009

10%

4-7 Rating 2008

19%

4-7 Rating 2007

%

4-7 Rating 2006

25%

4-7 Rating 2004

18%

4-7 Rating 2003

20%

 

8-10 Rating 2012

64%

8-10 Rating 2011

57%

8-10 Rating 2010

60%

8-10 Rating 2009

60%

8-10 Rating 2008

55%

8-10 Rating 2007

71%

8-10 Rating 2006

58%

8-10 Rating 2004

54%

8-10 Rating 2003

61%

 

 

DK/Ref 2012

16.5%

DK/Ref 2011

3%

DK/Ref 2010

13%

DK/Ref 2009

20%

DK/Ref 2008

17%

DK/Ref 2007

5%

DK/Ref 2006

6%

DK/Ref 2004

20%

DK/Ref 2003

10%

 


Timeframe for Delivery of Services

 

Client ratings of the timeframe for delivery of services saw a favorable swing in 2012.  More than four in five clients (86%) reported a satisfactory rating, a 6 percentage point increase from last year.  The number of clients offering a dissatisfied rating dropped considerably (9%, down 6 percentage points).  The number of clients issuing a neutral rating (3%, down 1 percentage points) or unwilling/unable to answer the question (2%, up 1 percentage point) remained consistent with last year’s figures.

 

 

How satisfied were you with the overall timeframe for delivery of services?

2003 n=163, 2004 n=141, 2006 n=84, 2007 n=90, 2008 n=95, 2009 n=51, 2010 n=45,

2011 n=74, 2012 n=61

 

Satisfied Rating 2012

86%

Satisfied Rating 2011

80%

Satisfied Rating 2010

93%

Satisfied Rating 2009

84%

Satisfied Rating 2008

74%

Satisfied Rating 2007

80%

Satisfied Rating 2006

80%

Satisfied Rating 2004

82%

Satisfied Rating 2003

82%

 

Neutral Rating 2012

3%

Neutral Rating 2011

4%

Neutral Rating 2010

2%

Neutral Rating 2009

2%

Neutral Rating 2008

1%

Neutral Rating 2007

2%

Neutral Rating 2006

4%

Neutral Rating 2004

0%

Neutral Rating 2003

1%

 

 

 

 

 

Dissatisfied Rating 2012

9%

Dissatisfied Rating 2011

15%

Dissatisfied Rating 2010

5%

Dissatisfied Rating 2009

8%

Dissatisfied Rating 2008

18%

Dissatisfied Rating 2007

15%

Dissatisfied Rating 2006

17%

Dissatisfied Rating 2004

14%

Dissatisfied Rating 2003

14%

 

 

DK/Ref 2012

2%

DK/Ref 2011

1%

DK/Ref 2010

0%

DK/Ref 2009

6%

DK/Ref 2008

6%

DK/Ref 2007

3%

DK/Ref 2006

0%

DK/Ref 2004

4%

DK/Ref 2003

3%

 


Overall Satisfaction with Vocational Rehabilitation Services

 

There was a sizable yet statistically insignificant increase in the number of clients reporting high satisfaction with the services provided by the Vocational Rehabilitation Division of BESB.  Nearly three out of four clients (74%, up 18.5 percentage points) reported high levels of a satisfaction, a figure that represents an all-time high for this question.  The number of clients offering dissatisfactory ratings dropped to its lowest level in the history of this survey (3%, down 16 percentage points).  The number of respondents citing average levels of satisfaction also decreased (20%, down 4.5 percentage points).

 

What is your overall satisfaction with the services provided by the Vocational Rehabilitation Division of BESB?

2003 n=163, 2004 n=141, 2006 n=84, 2007 n=90, 2008 n=95, 2009 n=51, 2010 n=46,

2011 n=74, 2012 n=61

 

1-3 Rating 2012

3%

1-3 Rating 2011

19%

1-3 Rating 2010

2%

1-3 Rating 2009

4%

1-3 Rating 2008

11%

1-3 Rating 2007

6%

1-3 Rating 2006

4%

1-3 Rating 2004

5%

1-3 Rating 2003

4%

 

4-7 Rating 2012

20%

4-7 Rating 2011

24.5%

4-7 Rating 2010

23%

4-7 Rating 2009

12%

4-7 Rating 2008

15%

4-7 Rating 2007

17%

4-7 Rating 2006

26%

4-7 Rating 2004

18%

4-7 Rating 2003

21%

 

8-10 Rating 2012

74%

8-10 Rating 2011

55.5%

8-10 Rating 2010

68%

8-10 Rating 2009

69%

8-10 Rating 2008

73%

8-10 Rating 2007

71%

8-10 Rating 2006

68%

8-10 Rating 2004

72%

8-10 Rating 2003

73%

 

DK/Ref 2011

3%

DK/Ref 2011

1%

DK/Ref 2010

7%

DK/Ref 2009

15%

DK/Ref 2008

2%

DK/Ref 2007

7%

DK/Ref 2006

2%

DK/Ref 2004

5%

DK/Ref 2003

2%


Extent Services Met Expectations

 

There was a sizable increase in the number of clients who reported that the services provided by BESB exceeded their expectations in 2012 (providing an 8-10 rating).  This figure went up by 13.5 percentage points from 2011, matching the all-time high set in 2007 (69%).  The number of people reporting average feelings (4-7 ratings) saw a slight decrease (20%, down 4.5 percentage points).  The number of dissatisfied clients (ratings of 1-3) saw a sizable but statistically insignificant decrease (6%; down 13 percentage points).

 

To what extent have the services met your expectations?

2003 n=163, 2004 n=141, 2006 n=84, 2007 n=90, 2008 = 95, 2009 n=51, 2010 n=46,

2011 n=74, 2012 n=61

 

1-3 Rating 2012

6%

1-3 Rating 2011

19%

1-3 Rating 2010

2%

1-3 Rating 2009

6%

1-3 Rating 2008

12%

1-3 Rating 2007

9%

1-3 Rating 2006

7%

1-3 Rating 2004

5%

1-3 Rating 2003

6%

 

4-7 Rating 2012

20%

4-7 Rating 2011

24.5%

4-7 Rating 2010

38%

4-7 Rating 2009

10%

4-7 Rating 2008

19%

4-7 Rating 2007

19%

4-7 Rating 2006

31%

4-7 Rating 2004

26%

4-7 Rating 2003

25%

 

8-10 Rating 2012

69%

8-10 Rating 2011

55.5%

8-10 Rating 2010

60%

8-10 Rating 2009

68%

8-10 Rating 2008

64%

8-10 Rating 2007

69%

8-10 Rating 2006

58%

8-10 Rating 2004

67%

8-10 Rating 2003

65%

 

DK/Ref 2012

5%

DK/Ref 2011

1%

DK/Ref 2010

0%

DK/Ref 2009

16%

DK/Ref 2008

5%

DK/Ref 2007

3%

DK/Ref 2006

4%

DK/Ref 2004

2%

DK/Ref 2003

4%

 


Recommending BESB Vocational Rehabilitation Services

 

The number of clients who would recommend BESB to a friend matched the all-time high set in 2010.  More than nine out of ten clients (94%, up 2 percentage points) reported that they would recommend BESB Vocational Rehabilitation Services to a friend. 

 

Based on your experience, would you recommend BESB Vocational Rehabilitation Services to a friend?

2003 n=163, 2004 n=141, 2006 n=84, 2007 n=90, 2008=95, 2009 n=51, 2010 n=49, 2011 n=73, 2012 n=61

 

Yes 2012

94%

Yes 2011

92%

Yes 2010

94%

Yes 2009

90%

Yes 2008

89%

Yes 2007

92%

Yes 2006

92%

Yes 2004

93%

Yes 2003

90%

 

No 2012

3%

No 2011

7%

No 2010

4%

No 2009

4%

No 2008

9%

No 2007

7%

No 2006

7%

No 2004

5%

No 2003

8%

 

DK/Ref 2012

3%

DK/Ref 2011

1%

DK/Ref 2010

2%

DK/Ref 2009

6%

DK/Ref 2008

1%

DK/Ref 2007

1%

DK/Ref 2006

1%

DK/Ref 2004

2%

DK/Ref 2003

2%

 

 


Methodology

 

The Vocational Rehabilitation Division at the Board of Education and Services for the Blind  commissioned the Center for Public Policy and Social Research at Central Connecticut State University to conduct an annual customer satisfaction survey for clients who received services during the 2012 fiscal year. 

 

This survey represents a continuation of the research previous conducted at the University of Connecticut from 2003 through 2008.  For 2012, a total of 66 complete interviews were conducted from July 30 through August 6, 2012.  Complete interviews constitute that the respondent followed the interview to its entirety.  The instrument, as well as the list of clients from which this survey data is drawn, was provided by BESB.    

 

Out of the sample of 103 clients who received services from BESB during the 2012 fiscal year, eleven clients refused to respond to the survey.  Twenty-three clients were deemed to be unreachable.  CPPSR called clients a minimum of 5 times, though in most cases attempts reached upwards of 9 calls.

 

CPPSR noted no statistically significant changes in responses from 2011 to 2012.  Out of respondents who CPPSR was able to reach, this survey has a 5% margin of error at the 95% confidence interval.  This means that statistical anomalies outside of the +/- 5 margin of error will only exist approximately five percent of the time.

 


 

 

 

Connecticut Board of Education and Services for the Blind

Vocational Rehabilitation Division

 

 

Annotated Questionnaire:

Fiscal Year 2012

 

Issued September 2012

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

            Conducted by:

 

 

 

 

Hello.  May I speak with <FNAME> <LNAME>, please? My name is $I. I am calling on behalf of the Vocational Rehabilitation Division at the Connecticut Board of Education and Services for the Blind (BESB). We are conducting a survey evaluating the services you received and need your opinions.  The results of the study will be kept confidential and will only be used in an effort to improve the program. For those questions dealing with employment and career issues, please keep in mind that for many BESB clients, homemaker is considered as employment.

 

IQ1. First, I would like to ask you about the types of services you received from the Board of Education and Services for the Blind (BESB).

 

Q1a. Have you received Low Vision Services? 

 

Yes

79%

No

21%

Don't know

--